By: the Growing Resilience Team I’ve long been a champion of the five principles of soil health — things like keeping the soil covered, minimizing disturbance, maintaining living roots, promoting diversity, and integrating livestock. These ideas have shaped my work and my conversations with farmers across the country. But it wasn’t until I interviewed Clinton Rasmusson out in White River, South Dakota, that the sixth principle — context — really hit home for me. Context means you don’t take a prescription and apply it blindly. It means you read the landscape. You learn its history. You listen to its limitations. And you recognize its possibilities. When Cattle Aren’t Enough I’ve always pictured livestock integration — the fifth principle — as cattle on cornstalks or cattle on cover crops. That’s been the mental model in my mind’s eye. But as I listened to Clinton describe what has happened in his part of the world — the slow, steady march of eastern red cedar across once-open grasslands — I realized that model doesn’t always fit. Eastern red cedar, sometimes called the “Green Glacier,” is swallowing up parts of South Dakota’s prairies. It shades out grass. It hogs water. It fills up pastures with dense, scratchy thickets. And in Clinton’s case, it makes a springtime search for calves in rough country a full-contact sport. Clinton’s words stuck with me: “I was crawling through that crap, trying to tag calves with pissed-off mamas.” This is no place for a cowboy on horseback to manage a hundred cows. This is a place that needs a different tool. Goats Fit the Context Clinton’s tool of choice? Spanish goats. He didn’t start out with a grand vision. Like most good ideas, it grew from experience. A neighbor convinced him to buy ten goats just to try them out. Soon enough, he had 60 head — tough, scrappy animals that thrive on the very plants cattle won’t touch. Cedar. Yucca. Skunkbush sumac. Goats go after all of it. “They strip everything,” Clinton told me. “Stuff you couldn’t walk through — after a week with the goats, I could get in and out no problem.” This is the work of 57 nannies on 15 acres with roughly 1000 cedar trees this spring. Almost every cedar tree had some damage. They stripped branches  from the skunk brush and destroyed every yucca plant. The lightbulb went on for me: this is livestock integration in context. Not every place is cattle country anymore — not after years of cedar encroachment. And if we’re serious about regenerating these landscapes, we need to integrate the right kind of livestock for the job. Sometimes that means cows. Sometimes it means sheep. And sometimes it means goats. Beyond Brush Control — Toward Land Healing Of course, Clinton isn’t just running goats for weed control. He’s also building a business — marketing goats into a growing demand for goat meat, especially among immigrant populations across the Midwest. But what strikes me most is that Clinton is doing something powerful for the land itself. Goats are buying him time — time before fire rips through cedar-choked draws, time before the brush takes over completely, time to heal and restore a landscape that once fed cattle and now feeds trees. And they’re doing it on rough country where machinery can’t reach, where chemical spraying isn’t practical, and where prescribed burning is often risky. It’s a labor-intensive way of working. It takes fencing. It takes dogs. It takes daily checking. But it works. And it works because  it fits the context. What This Means for Me — And Maybe for You For a long time, I resisted adding the sixth principle of soil health — context — to the list. I liked the simplicity of five. But after talking with Clinton, I’ve changed my mind. Context belongs there. And it belongs in our conversations with farmers and ranchers. If you’re farming in corn country, cattle on cover crops might be your best bet. If you’re on prairie that’s been overtaken by cedar and brush, maybe goats — or sheep — are your ticket to healing the land. The principle stays the same: livestock integration. But the practice changes — because the land changes. And if we’re paying attention — really paying attention — we’ll change with it. ______________________________________________ ______________________ Visit these “Growing Resilience Through Our Soils” information pages: 1. Podcast page for drought planning fact sheets, Q&As, news, podcasts, and more. 2. Video page to watch videos of other ranchers’ journeys toward improved rangeland/pasture. 3. Follow Growing Resilience on social media: Facebook - Growing Resilience Twitter - @GrowResilience_ Instagram - growingresilience.sd 4. Our homepage: www.growingresiliencesd.com

By:   the Growing Resilience Team A couple of weeks ago, we shared two posts that lit up our social media channels like never before. The topic? You guessed it: tillage. The first post was a short but controversial video of Dakota Lake Research Farm’s Dr. Dwayne Beck saying: “Grandpa had more organic matter than you do. All tillage tools destroy soil structure. All tillage tools decrease water infiltration… All tillage tools reduce organic matter…” The second was a graphic comparing tillage and no-till side-by-side. We posted these not to divide, but to spark conversation about something we care deeply about: soil stewardship. And boy, did it spark a discussion . Big time. As of May 21, the Beck video has received over 110,000 views, 659 likes , and 73 comments. The no-till vs. tillage image made steady rounds—but when it was shared to the Tillage Kings Facebook group, it truly took off: 81 likes, 99 laughing reactions, over 200 comments, and dozens of farmers weighing in from all corners of the country. We read every comment. And with the help of AI, yes, AI, to analyze the themes and trends in the comments , we sorted through hundreds of responses from more than 130 contributors. Why We’re Genuinely Listening One comment showed up repeatedly from no-till skeptics: “Where’s the peer-reviewed literature?” It’s a fair question. And it’s one we’re taking seriously. We’re now digging into the peer-reviewed literature—not to prove a point, but to bring clarity to a conversation that clearly matters to many of us. Much of that research comes in the form of meta-analyses and long-term field studies , and we’ll be drawing from those sources to try and address the themes raised in the feedback. This isn’t about saving face. It’s about honoring the moment and the people who showed up in it. If we want better stewardship, we need better conversations—rooted in respect, science, and experience. What We Heard The responses weren’t one sided—and that’s what made them so valuable. Here's how the perspectives broke down from our 131 commenters: 41% were clearly skeptical of no-till, citing yield declines, compaction, weed pressure, and doubts about the science. 7% were strongly pro no-till , especially when paired with cover crops, rotation, and systems thinking. 52% , fell into a middle ground , emphasizing flexibility, local context, and practical experience over ideology. From these discussions, eight key themes emerged: No-till can work—but is it at the cost of yield? Not necessarily. Some farmers reported no yield drag, and even yield gains. Both outcomes are real. The common thread? It depends on the soil, the system, and the willingness to adapt. Long-term no-till comes with real challenges. Several farmers described problems like compaction, poor emergence, and increased disease or weed pressure over time—especially in humid or poorly drained soils. Chemical dependency in no-till is a growing concern. Some voiced strong unease about no-till becoming synonymous with “spray-only” systems, especially where cover crops or diversity were missing. Most producers use a “toolbox” approach. Whether it’s strip-till corn, no-till soybeans, or shallow vertical tillage for wheat, many described adapting tillage to match the needs of each crop, season, and year. Context is everything. Commenters emphasized that soil type, rainfall patterns, drainage, equipment, and labor all shape what’s possible. One farmer put it simply: “You’ve got to farm the field you have.” Soil biology and regeneration matter to everyone. Across the spectrum, many expressed a desire to build better soil—not just manage inputs—and credited living roots, cover crops, and diversity as key to long-term productivity. Tillage isn’t evil—it’s a tool. Several folks defended strategic tillage as a necessary and legitimate part of their system, especially to manage residue or address compaction after wet years. Oversimplified messaging creates unnecessary division. Some pushed back against blanket praise of no-till, arguing that slogans like “all tillage is bad” ignore complexity and alienate those who are genuinely trying to do the right thing in tough conditions. What’s your experience? If you’ve got a story, a question, or a challenge to what we’re saying— comment and share. We’re listening. And we’re learning. Because what’s at stake isn’t a farming method. It’s the future of our land. Mind how you go, Buz Kloot & the Growing Resilience Team ______________________________________________ ______________________ Visit these “Growing Resilience Through Our Soils” information pages: 1. Podcast page for drought planning fact sheets, Q&As, news, podcasts, and more. 2. Video page to watch videos of other ranchers’ journeys toward improved rangeland/pasture. 3. Follow Growing Resilience on social media: Facebook - Growing Resilience Twitter - @GrowResilience_ Instagram - growingresilience.sd 4. Our homepage: www.growingresiliencesd.com

By the Growing Resilience Team When we posted a video of Dr. Dwayne Beck explaining how tillage destroys soil structure and reduces infiltration, we expected a little pushback—but not hundreds of comments. What followed was one of our most active conversations yet, with producers from across the region offering both challenges and praise. It confirmed something we already suspected: There’s no one-size-fits-all answer when it comes to tillage and yield. So, we did what we always try to do—go to the science. We reviewed two of the largest and most respected global studies ever conducted on no-till and yield. Both are peer-reviewed meta-analyses , which means they don’t rely on just one or two experiments—instead, they combine data from hundreds of field trials , across dozens of crops, climates, and countries. Think of it as the “aggregated wisdom” of years of side-by-side comparisons. Here’s what they found—and how it lines up with what farmers in South Dakota and beyond are already telling us. Study 1: Nature 2015 — “Productivity Limits and Potentials of Conservation Agriculture” This paper analyzed 5,463 yield observations from 610 field studies comparing no-till and conventional tillage across the globe. Published in Nature, one of the highest-impact journals in science, it set the tone for a decade of soil health debate. Headline result? On average, no-till yields were 5.7% lower than tilled systems. But here’s the catch: When no-till was combined with residue retention and crop rotation , the yield gap dropped to 2.5% , and in many cases, disappeared. In rainfed crops in dry areas (aridity index < 0.65, so that’s pretty much all of South Dakota) , no-till with good rotation and cover often outperformed tillage, thanks to better water retention and soil structure. In humid, cool climates, or when no-till was used without rotation or residue retention, yields dropped more significantly. Study 2: Field Crops Research  2015 — “When Does No-Till Yield More?” This second meta-analysis from the same lead author analyzed an even bigger dataset: 6,005 yield comparisons from 678 studies . It focused more closely on which conditions tipped the scales for or against no-till. It confirmed all of the above and added these important takeaways: In dry climates (so, most of South Dakota) , no-till outperformed tillage in 55% of cases —especially when residue was retained and crop rotation was practiced. In wet soils , tillage often helps dry and warm the ground, explaining its popularity in places like Minnesota, Iowa, and Missouri . Time matters : No-till yields were often lower in the first 1–2 years—but caught up after 5–10 years in most systems. What This Means for Us on the Ground “Roughly speaking, there’s a ‘yield response line’ that follows the aridity index line of 0.65 , running northeast to southwest through western Minnesota , northwestern Iowa , and into eastern Nebraska and Kansas . West of the line , conditions are drier. No-till often wins here—especially when paired with the full system: rotation, residue, and sometimes livestock. East of the line , wetter soils and colder springs mean that a tillage pass may help get crops in the ground quicker, especially if residue or rotation are lacking. “We Can’t Do It With No-Till Alone” That’s what Dr. Dwayne Beck says at Dakota Lakes Research Farm , where they’ve been pioneering resilient systems for decades. No-till is just one tool. The real power comes from stacking practices: Diverse rotations (especially small grains) Cover crops Soil armor Reduced disturbance Livestock integration Farmers near the Missouri River—on both sides—are showing what this looks like in practice. It lines up with what both the science and the social media feedback we received tells us: no-till is a tool in our toolbox, best used with the other tools! Final Thought: It’s Not Just About Yield Many of you told us why you till. Some said it helped yields. Others said it helped get on the field in time. But still others told us that no-till gave them their time back —less time in the tractor, more time with family, fewer washouts, better infiltration. If that’s part of what stewardship looks like to you—we’re listening. Sources If you have trouble finding these documents online, we will post these two papers on our Free Resources site at https://www.growingresiliencesd.com/free-resources   Pittelkow CM, Liang X, Linquist BA, et al. Productivity limits and potentials of the principles of conservation agriculture. Nature . 2015;517:365–368. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13809   Pittelkow CM, Linquist BA, Lundy ME, et al. When does no-till yield more? A global meta-analysis. Field Crops Research . 2015;183:156–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2015.07.020 ______________________________________________ ______________________ Visit these “Growing Resilience Through Our Soils” information pages: 1. Podcast page for drought planning fact sheets, Q&As, news, podcasts, and more. 2. Video page to watch videos of other ranchers’ journeys toward improved rangeland/pasture. 3. Follow Growing Resilience on social media: Facebook - Growing Resilience Twitter - @GrowResilience_ Instagram - growingresilience.sd 4. Our homepage: www.growingresiliencesd.com

By Buz Kloot In late April, Joe Dickie and I traveled up to South Dakota, chasing a spring that felt just out of reach. Our first stop was with Dawn Butzer, and if there’s a better way to start a trip, I don’t know it. Dawn grew up with livestock in her blood—cattle were simply part of life. But after attending a South Dakota Grasslands Grazing School, something shifted. What had always been passion became purpose. She and her husband made the bold decision to buy cropland they had once leased and restore it to native prairie. It wasn't an easy path. Dawn shared how she had wrestled through the bidding process, how deeply personal the decision had been. "I fasted for three days so that somehow we could buy this land," she said. "I didn’t want it just to stay cropland. I wanted it to become something more." When they finally got it, it felt like more than a purchase. It felt like an answer. On Good Friday this year, they planted their first field back to prairie. As we walked the field with her, we dropped to our knees, scratching through the grain drill furrows for signs of life. And there it was—the thin white radicles of oats pushing through the black soil, and finer still, the threadlike beginnings of native grasses taking hold. Dawn smiled through tears and said, "Every seed that grows is a miracle." You could see it in her face—the mixture of awe, gratitude, and hope woven into every word. The seed mix she planted—designed with help from Pete Bauman and NRCS conservationist Jay Hermann—was carefully built for biodiversity and resilience. More than twenty-five native species were included, among them big bluestem, sideoats grama, switchgrass, and little bluestem, anchored alongside vibrant forbs like purple prairie clover, eastern purple coneflower, and black-eyed Susan. This wasn’t a quick cover crop. This was a prairie-in-the-making, a habitat for grazing, wildlife, and soil restoration. As we stood there, Dawn said, "You have to trust the process you can’t always see. It’s like faith—you believe in the promise before you see the harvest." Looking out across the rough new field, she added, "When I walk out here now, I don’t see crops—I see a future." It’s easy to be cynical about agriculture today. Markets go up and down. Margins tighten. But standing there with Dawn, watching those first green shoots push against the prairie winds, I realized that hope still grows wild and strong in South Dakota. Dawn Butzer isn't just planting seeds. She's planting a story—and it's just beginning. And I can't wait to go back. Download Dawn Butzer’s full NRCS-approved seeding plan (PDF) ______________________________________________ ______________________ Visit these “Growing Resilience Through Our Soils” information pages: 1. Podcast page for drought planning fact sheets, Q&As, news, podcasts, and more. 2. Video page to watch videos of other ranchers’ journeys toward improved rangeland/pasture. 3. Follow Growing Resilience on social media: Facebook - Growing Resilience Twitter - @GrowResilience_ Instagram - growingresilience.sd 4. Our homepage: www.growingresiliencesd.com

Please note: If   any of the references below   are unavailable, please   let us know, and we can access them through our university library. In recent weeks, we've delved deep into the peer-reviewed literature to understand better the complex relationship between no-till agriculture and chemical inputs like herbicides, pesticides, and synthetic fertilizers. This topic has repeatedly come up in online discussions, and we were genuinely surprised to see how, for many, no-till has become synonymous with increased chemical spraying. Either way, here’s what we do know: this topic deserves more than a quick soundbite. We aim to promote stewardship, not dogma, which means being honest about what the data says and what it doesn’t. Herbicide Use in No-Till Systems No-till farming generally reduces the need for mechanical weed control, but often increases reliance on herbicides. According to a 2025 Friends of the Earth report, 93% of U.S. no-till corn and soybean acres  rely on synthetic herbicides, contributing to 33% of all pesticide use nationally ( Friends of the Earth, 2025 ). This reliance on chemicals is not without consequence, and like it or not, our community can’t ignore these numbers. As Beyond Pesticides notes, herbicide residues from no-till systems have been detected in nearby water bodies, raising red flags for ecological and public health ( Beyond Pesticides, 2021 ). While some organic systems advocate for strategic tillage, institutions like the Rodale Institute demonstrate that systems built on cover crops and crop diversity can outperform conventional no-till in terms of soil carbon, microbial life, and resilience ( Rodale Institute, 2023 ). However, it's important to recognize that some sources use the data to support a strongly ideological viewpoint. Reports like those from Friends of the Earth and Beyond Pesticides often use the data to advocate for a shift to fully organic systems. While we admire the long-term goals of organic agriculture, we also believe that a more balanced view is needed for our audience, that is large-scale row crop farmers on the Great Plains. When used judiciously and as part of a broader system of soil stewardship, chemicals may have a smaller environmental footprint than the soil disturbance and erosion associated with conventional tillage, as Dr. Dwayne Beck has said, tillage—especially when repeated and deep—is a “catastrophic event” for soil. Pesticide and Fertilizer Dynamics While no-till practices reduce erosion and can decrease runoff of soil-bound chemicals, pesticide runoff is not always reduced. A meta-analysis by Elias et al. (2018) found that pesticide runoff depends more on the chemical's properties and rainfall timing than tillage per se. “Overall, the concentration and load of pesticides were greater in runoff from NT fields, especially pesticides with high solubility and low affinity for solids. Thus, NT farming affects soil properties that control pesticide retention and interactions with soils, and ultimately their mobility in the environment.”   ( Elias et al., 2018 ). The study looked primarily at conventional no-till systems without incorporating additional soil health practices like cover crops or rotation. Similarly, fertilizer use remains high in many no-till systems. Friends of the Earth reports that 92% of no-till corn acres in the U.S. use synthetic nitrogen at an average of 150 pounds per acre. This undercuts the notion that no-till alone  guarantees  a lower-input system. The Power of Integrated Approaches Here’s where more hopeful research offers better insights. At the Dakota Lakes Research Farm, Dr. Dwayne Beck has emphasized that “no-till alone won’t get us there.” Instead, he and cooperating farmers focus on full systems: diverse rotations (especially with small grains), living roots, soil armor, cover crops, and livestock integration. Combined with minimal disturbance, these practices can dramatically reduce the need for synthetic inputs and improve long-term soil health. Similarly, Dr. Jonathan Lundgren’s work at Ecdysis Foundation shows that regenerative farms—those integrating soil health principles—can significantly lower insecticide and herbicide use while maintaining or even improving profitability and ecological function. A long-term study at Iowa State's Marsden Farm ( Nguyen 2016 ) found that diversified rotations with reduced chemical inputs not only maintained yields but also improved soil health and reduced weed pressure ( Wired, 2012 ). So, What Should We Make of This? No-till alone isn’t a silver bullet. When practiced in isolation, it can create new dependencies on synthetic inputs. But when integrated into a full soil health system, no-till can reduce labor, improve soil structure, and, with the right practices , begin to reduce chemical reliance too. While we appreciate   the genuinely valid concerns about herbicide use in no-till, focusing only on chemical impacts ignores the very real damage caused by tillage, especially erosion, nutrient loss, and particulate phosphorus runoff into water bodies. If our goal is stewardship, we must weigh both sides of the scale. We’ll continue exploring the complex realities of tillage, inputs, and soil health in the coming weeks. For now, we hope this blog provides a clearer, more honest look at the tradeoffs—and opportunities—in today’s no-till systems. References: Friends of the Earth. Pesticide-Intensive No-Till Agriculture: A Report on Environmental and Health Risks. 2025. Available from: https://foe.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Report_No-Till_Report.pdf Beyond Pesticides. Herbicide Use in "Regenerative" No-Till Agriculture Contaminates Water Bodies. 2021. Available from: https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2021/02/herbicide-use-in-regenerative-no-till-contaminates-waterbodies Elias EM. Pesticide Runoff in No-Till Systems: A Meta-Analysis. Indiana University ScholarWorks. 2018. Available from: https://scholarworks.indianapolis.iu.edu/bitstream/1805/17406/1/Elias_2018_meta-analysis.pdf Nguyen H. Reducing herbicide use through cropping system diversification: A case study at the Iowa State University Marsden Farm, and some recommendations for the Mekong Delta of Vietnam [master's thesis]. Ames, IA: Iowa State University; 2016. Available from: https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/entities/publication/3fc0e87c-7466-4973-b3e2-910caf387735 Rodale Institute. New Report Identifies Toxic Impact of No-Till Agriculture. 2023. Available from: https://rodaleinstitute.org/blog/new-report-identifies-toxic-impact-of-no-till-agriculture-inaccurately-referred-to-as-regenerative Keim B. Big, Smart, Green and Made in Iowa. WIRED. 2012. Available from: https://www.wired.com/2012/10/big-smart-green-farming Ecdysis Foundation. Research Highlights and Impact. 2023. Available from: https://www.ecdysis.bio/research ______________________________________________ ______________________ Visit these “Growing Resilience Through Our Soils” information pages: 1. Podcast page for drought planning fact sheets, Q&As, news, podcasts, and more. 2. Video page to watch videos of other ranchers’ journeys toward improved rangeland/pasture. 3. Follow Growing Resilience on social media: Facebook - Growing Resilience Twitter - @GrowResilience_ Instagram - growingresilience.sd 4. Our homepage: www.growingresiliencesd.com

Natalie Sturm By the Growing Resilience Team For decades, no-till has been hailed as a cornerstone of regenerative agriculture—an essential practice to protect soil while still producing food, feed, fuel, and fiber. However, a groundbreaking thesis by soil scientist Natalie Sturm, conducted at the Dakota Lakes Research Farm in central South Dakota, shows that no-till is only part of the equation. It’s not just about reducing disturbance. It’s about what you grow—and how you grow it. Natalie’s study examined nearly 30 years of data (1991–2021) across both irrigated and dryland cropping systems, all under long-term no-till. Her findings are clear: how you design your crop rotation—particularly how much residue you return to the soil and how diverse your system is—has an impact on soil health and grain yields. Key Finding #1: Residue and Diversity Are Game Changers for Soil Health Even under the same no-till management, rotations that included a greater proportion of crops with high carbon-to-nitrogen ratio residues (like corn, sorghum, and winter wheat) and greater diversity  (a mix of grasses, broadleaf crops, and cool/warm seasons) showed: Higher soil organic matter (SOM) , Better soil structure , measured by mean aggregate size, Stronger fungal communities and higher microbial diversity , Lower surface runoff and better infiltration . For example, the corn-corn-soy-winter wheat/cover-soy  rotation (C-C-S-W-S)—which included about 60% high-carbon crops and high diversity—produced better soil fungal populations and greater aggregate size than simpler systems like corn-soy  (C-S), which had only 50%  high-carbon crops and low diversity. Key Finding #2: You Don’t Have to Sacrifice Yield Some worry that adding more crops—or stepping away from simplified rotations—will reduce grain yields. But at Dakota Lakes, the opposite proved true. The first-year irrigated corn in C-C-S-W-S  averaged 212.2 bu/ac , outperforming both the corn-soy rotation (198.2 bu/ac) and continuous corn (183.5 bu/ac). It should be noted that second-year corn however, yielded 191.4 bu/ac. In dryland systems, wheat-corn-broadleaf and wheat-wheat-sorghum-corn-broadleaf  maintained or slightly improved wheat yields compared to a rotation with a broadleaf crop every other year while also building better soil—especially at deeper layers. Rotations with higher proportions of high-carbon crops consistently showed more yield stability over time , even in tougher years. In fact, the simpler corn-soy system only outperformed C-C-S-W-S in 4 of the 17 years  studied. Key Finding #3: Soil Health Is More Than Just Going No-Till Natalie’s work also revealed that diversity alone isn’t enough  if it doesn’t come with residue. High diversity with low biomass can leave soils biologically rich but chemically and physically degraded. Conversely, continuous corn , with 100% residue, built SOC but lacked the biological diversity needed for yield gains. The sweet spot? Rotations that balance diversity and residue —typically with 60–80% high-carbon crops and 2 or more functional crop types . Why This Matters Too often, no-till is promoted as a one-size-fits-all solution. However, as Natalie’s thesis demonstrates, no-till without thoughtful crop rotation is like building a house without a foundation . It helps, but it doesn’t finish the job. To truly regenerate soil, support yields, and prepare for weather fluctuations, crop rotation must be front and center in soil health conversations. Natalie’s full thesis, “It’s Not Just No-Till: Crop Rotations Are Key to Improving Soil Quality and Grain Yields at Dakota Lakes Research Farm,” is now available [ here ] Natalie’s video on this subject is at this link: https://dakotalakes.com/its-not-just-no-till-with-natalie-sturm/ Dakota Lakes 2020 Field Day is also an excellent Resource.  The full playlist (20 videos) can be found [ here ] ______________________________________________ ______________________ Visit these “Growing Resilience Through Our Soils” information pages: 1. Podcast page for drought planning fact sheets, Q&As, news, podcasts, and more. 2. Video page to watch videos of other ranchers’ journeys toward improved rangeland/pasture. 3. Follow Growing Resilience on social media: Facebook - Growing Resilience Twitter - @GrowResilience_ Instagram - growingresilience.sd 4. Our homepage: www.growingresiliencesd.com

By Buz Kloot An old friend of mine grew up in Utah’s Cache Valley, where his dad, a worn-out dairyman, would shake his head after a long day and mutter, “I sure hope there ain’t no cows in heaven.” But I’m not so sure anymore—especially after visiting Cody Merrigan, a young farmer just a stone’s throw from the University of South Dakota’s Vermillion campus. Cody runs a mixed operation of row crops, cover crops, and stocker cattle in Clay County, where most folks stick to corn and soybeans and leave the livestock to someone else. “Other than Mr. Nissen,” he said, “no one else around here does what we do. It’s like living in a bubble.” On this “island,” Cody is doing something different: blending no-till, cover crops, and stocker cattle  in a way that doesn’t just cut inputs—it regenerates the land.  A Journey Sparked by a YouTube Video Cody didn’t start out with no-till or grazing covers. “I grew up conventional,” he says. But a soils teacher planted a seed, and a David Brandt video  on cover crops lit the spark. “It looked fun. Simple. So I gave it a shot. Planted some wheat and a cover crop. Total failure—no moisture. But I was hooked.” That curiosity led him to the Ranching for Profit school  and the South Dakota Grazing School . “Every year I’ve gotten better at grazing—on native range, cover crops, everything,” he says. “But it really started with one video.” A System That Regenerates, Rotates, and Flexes Cody's system is built on keeping living roots in the soil year-round and grazing strategically. Here’s how it works: “Full year, whether it’s corn or soy—it doesn’t matter what it is—it’s getting a cover crop of some kind in the fall.” In spring, as those covers green up, he grazes them for 45–90 days, then sends the cattle to native range while he plants a full-season warm-season cover crop  (like sorghum-sudan or millet). That full-season cover is then grazed in summer, followed by a cool-season mix in the fall . “I come right back around again in September and put it into a cool-season mix. My goal is to have something growing on the land year-round.” Originally, he followed a corn-soy-wheat rotation, but struggled to grow anything in August. “Trying to grow something in August in Southeast South Dakota was a terrible time. So I shifted to planting in June—when we usually have more moisture.” Why Stockers? Why Now? Cody’s move from cow-calf to stockers was all about flexibility. With grazing windows shifting and drought always a possibility, stockers let him adapt on the fly. “If we start to go dry, I can sell them. I can match my stocking rate to the forage I have. Cow-calf guys don’t have that option in June and July.” He admits stockers come with their own challenges—training and health being top among them—but he enjoys the work. And then there’s Kevin , the unexpected leader steer: “Kevin has made it awesome. I’ll put him with a new group and he knows when I show up—hey, we’re going somewhere new. I follow him, and they follow me. Sometimes he goes the wrong way, but most of the time he’s a huge asset.” The Most Important Priority What struck us most wasn’t the soil or the yields—it was the time . Cody has restructured his entire system around what matters most: his wife and three daughters. “I have an order of priorities: family is number one, work is number two. I can’t say five years ago that’s how I operated.” Every decision—from adopting no-till to running stockers—is shaped by that mindset. “Give me 45 minutes to move cattle, check fence and water,” he said, “and you’ve got me for the rest of the day.” If his wife and daughters want to go camping, he just gives the cattle a bigger paddock. The system bends with life, not the other way around. Cody Merrigan’s farm may be an island in Clay County, but it’s no silo. His story is part of a broader movement we’re hearing again and again—farmers designing systems that fit their lives, regenerate their land, and still leave room for dinner with the family. It’s hard work. It’s not perfect. But it might just be a little heaven-sent. ______________________________________________ ______________________ Visit these “Growing Resilience Through Our Soils” information pages: 1. Podcast page for drought planning fact sheets, Q&As, news, podcasts, and more. 2. Video page to watch videos of other ranchers’ journeys toward improved rangeland/pasture. 3. Follow Growing Resilience on social media: Facebook - Growing Resilience Twitter - @GrowResilience_ Instagram - growingresilience.sd 4. Our homepage: www.growingresiliencesd.com

This past Friday morning, I was sitting in my local coffee shop, enjoying a cup of joe and catching up on the latest Our Amazing Grasslands  video from the South Dakota Grassland Coalition. As I watched, I saw a few familiar faces pop up on the screen—SDSU’s Pete Bauman, that larger-than-life dynamo (seriously, where does he get his energy?); Josh Lefers, the rancher-philosopher who also happens to be Audubon Dakota’s Director of Conservation; Mike McKernan, a boots-on-the-ground East River rancher; and a new voice to me—SDSU’s Madison Kovarna, a beef nutrition specialist with a fresh and practical perspective. Now, the message in this video isn’t necessarily new. But it still managed to blow my mind. This group has been collecting data on nutrients and minerals in native grasses and forbs, alongside the usual cool-season grasses: smooth brome, Kentucky bluegrass, and crested wheatgrass. They’ve sampled these plants across their life cycles—from spring flush through mid-summer slump to fall dormancy—and they’ve put hard numbers behind what many of us have only guessed at. And here’s the kicker: we’ve got folks, with the best will in the world, spending real money  to spray out “weeds” like goldenrod or native thistle. Then, a few months later, when their cool-season-invaded pastures have lost nutritional punch by late June, they turn around and spend more money  on feed supplements. What if the very plants we’re trying to kill are the ones that can save us money? Pete Bauman drops a truth bomb in the video: “We tested [goldenrod] simply for protein analysis, and it graded out as high as dairy-grade alfalfa—somewhere around 24% crude protein.” Are you kidding me? And Josh Lefers puts a fine point on it: “You can actually put real dollars into the value of that native plant forage.” This is not diversity for diversity’s sake. I’ve sat at ranch kitchen tables with folks who beam as they talk about 60, 70—even 100 species—in a single pasture. That’s not just biological richness. That’s resilience. That’s forage that feeds, heals, and saves money. My friend Dr. Fred Provenza puts it best: “The soil takes sunlight, carbon dioxide, and water and turns the land into a grocery store and a pharmacy.” But that only works if we manage for diversity. This video lays that out plainly. It’s not abstract. It’s not theoretical. It’s field-tested, South Dakota-grown evidence that diverse pastures are profitable pastures . Watch the full video: Catch the July episode of Our Amazing Grasslands  here:👉  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKHYzerG-QA&list=PLg6Jx7lcOmB2YcAWtowbjWSVTRBlCt17o Short on time? We’ve pulled a few of the best moments into video shorts on SD NRCS’s YouTube page . One of my favorites? Pete Bauman calmly explaining that goldenrod rivals alfalfa in protein . You won’t look at “weeds” the same way again.  ______________________________________________ ______________________ Visit these “Growing Resilience Through Our Soils” information pages: 1. Podcast page for drought planning fact sheets, Q&As, news, podcasts, and more. 2. Video page to watch videos of other ranchers’ journeys toward improved rangeland/pasture. 3. Follow Growing Resilience on social media: Facebook - Growing Resilience Twitter - @GrowResilience_ Instagram - growingresilience.sd 4. Our homepage: www.growingresiliencesd.com

We recently posted a video short of Pete Bauman talking about goldenrod on the July "Our Amazing Grasslands" video, and it took off! 110,000 plays and 1,000 likes in just 11 days. With that reach came a tidal wave of comments, and not surprisingly, many folks had strong opinions about goldenrod. They ranged from “Stupid! Stupid! Stupid! Let’s feed shoe leather” to “Spot on—my sheep will hit the goldenrod, sunflowers, amaranth, giant ragweed, and mares tail first.” In between those extremes were dozens of goldenrod-curious folks—people asking honest questions like, “But do cattle eat goldenrod?” or “Isn’t goldenrod toxic?” Some commented that goldenrod is especially dangerous during the second trimester of pregnancy. Others swore their goats wouldn’t touch it, despite planting it for pollinators. So let’s unpack this. Sorting Out the Toxicity Question Let’s start with what we’re talking about when we say “goldenrod.” If you’re in South Dakota or most of the eastern or central U.S., you’re almost certainly dealing with Solidago  species—Canada goldenrod (Solidago canadensis), tall goldenrod (Solidago altissima), Missouri goldenrod (Solidago missouriensis), and others. These are non-toxic native forbs . On the other hand, if you’re in parts of Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, or Arizona , you may be dealing with rayless goldenrod — Haplopappus heterophyllus (also known as Isocoma pluriflora). That’s an entirely different plant, and yes, it is toxic. Rayless goldenrod contains tremetol , a compound that can build up in an animal’s system and cause a condition known as "trembles." But here’s the key: according to USDA’s Poisonous Plants bulletins, livestock have to consume 1 to 1.5% of their body weight daily  for two to three weeks for symptoms to show up. So ask yourself: what kind of grazing management allows animals to spend that long on a pasture where that’s the only thing to eat? This isn’t just a plant problem—it’s a management problem. Pete Bauman and I talked about this exact point. We both agree that when animals are forced —say, midwinter in the Southwest with no other forage—then yes, toxic plants become dangerous. But on healthy pastures where animals have choices, it’s a different story entirely. Knowing the Range (and Your Animals) Fred Provenza talks often about how animals that are familiar with their home range behave differently than those that aren’t. In fact, he shared a story about a rancher who split his herd during drought—half stayed on their familiar range, and half were moved just one county over. The cattle on the new range suffered severe losses from locoweed, while the animals that stayed put were unaffected. Why? Because the home herd knew the landscape. They knew what to eat and what to avoid. This same idea applies to goldenrod and other so-called weeds. Animals raised on a pasture with goldenrod (the Solidago kind) simply don’t overeat it. Even goats will learn what’s edible and what’s not—but that learning happens in the context of familiarity and choice. Bottom Line If you’re seeing goldenrod and are worried about toxicity, the first step is to get your ID right; the accompanying image may be of use to you. If it’s Solidago, you’re not dealing with a toxic plant. If it’s Rayless goldenrod (Haplopappus heterophyllus), then yes—take precautions, especially during limited forage seasons. But before reaching for the herbicide jug, I’d echo Pete Bauman’s advice: ask why the weed is there in the first place.   Spraying edible “weeds” is money you’ll never get back . Changing the plant community—through grazing management—is where the real return lies. Coming up next, I’ll dig into the forage potential of goldenrod and what Pete has learned through years of observing cows graze it in South Dakota pastures. You might be surprised by what the protein tests show. Our Podcast Series with Dr. Fred Provenza Podcasts: Tap into the Hidden Wisdom of Livestock Top tips for unlocking Land and Livestock Potential Reimagining Agriculture: Rethinking our Relationships with Nature and the Land Useful References USDA/ARS “Poisonous Plants in the Western States,” Agriculture Information Bulletin No. 415 (discussion of tremetol risk and control recommendations). NMSU Bulletin B 114: Rayless Goldenrod and Livestock Poisonings  – describes biology, toxin, and control. USDA ARS Poisonous Plant Research page on Rayless Goldenrod (Haplopappus heterophyllus): detailed toxicosis features and management. USDA NRCS Plant Fact Sheets / Plant Guides for Solidago canadensis and S. missouriensis  – forage palatability, habitat, and uses. SDSU’s Pete Bauman article: Plan Now to Control Weeds by Grazing Next Season . ______________________________________________ ______________________ Visit these “Growing Resilience Through Our Soils” information pages: 1. Podcast page for drought planning fact sheets, Q&As, news, podcasts, and more. 2. Video page to watch videos of other ranchers’ journeys toward improved rangeland/pasture. 3. Follow Growing Resilience on social media: Facebook - Growing Resilience Twitter - @GrowResilience_ Instagram - growingresilience.sd 4. Our homepage: www.growingresiliencesd.com

Dr. Ray Weil Professor of Soils in the Department of Environmental Science & Technology at the University of Maryland, in a Soils Pit (no tilled for 30+ years) on the Steve Groff Farm in Pennsylvania. When I first started learning about soil, I wasn’t a trained agronomist—I just knew we were supposed to take soil samples down to 6" or 6¼". I didn’t question it at the time. Later, I learned that this 6" layer represents the old plow layer—the zone where most agronomic roots live. But here’s the kicker: they live there not because it’s ideal, but because the plow created a compacted “plow pan” beneath it. This dense, platy layer restricts root growth, moisture movement, and gas exchange. In effect, we were farming in flower pots. I remember standing with Dr. Ray Weil (co-author of The Nature and Properties of Soils ) in October 2014 at Steve Groff’s farm in Pennsylvania. The no-till field we were looking at had been farmed without tillage for over 30 years . We were in a seven-foot-deep soil pit —well over my head, and I’m six feet tall—looking at roots, soil layers, and what Ray called “a huge tank” of deeper water and nutrients separated from crops by a compacted zone. Ray’s message was simple: in many fields, roots can’t reach that tank. They’re blocked by the compaction left behind by decades of tillage, and without a path down, crops hit summer stress and yields drop. A lively debate When we shared Ray’s comments in a short video, the conversation took off online. Here’s a sampling of what people had to say: “Really, who doesn’t know about compaction. Thanks for telling us that.” “Ummm… yaa… ok… sooo, what are the latest potential remedies to loosen up compaction at that depth..???????” “What’s the fix?” “Around here a lot of folks use rippers.” and “Subsoiler is the answer.” “Depends on where you are and the soil type. Rippers are not recommended where I am in Australia.” “And that’s why one could grow a taproot variety of alfalfa if the economics fit. Ours fractured, add nitrogen and built organic matter.” “I’ve no-tilled for over 40 yrs I don’t have compacted soils.” “All well and good. Now make it cash flow. Because without that, it means nothing.” What surprised me was that no one mentioned cover crops —especially since Ray was instrumental in helping Steve Groff import tillage radish seed from Brazil in the early days, showing how biological solutions could address compaction naturally. What’s the fix? Mechanical fixes, like ripping with large shanks, can fracture the compacted layer for a season, but they’re expensive, fuel-intensive, and temporary, since tillage destroys the natural channels roots and earthworms create. Biological fixes, like deep-rooted cover crops , can be permanent—living roots and soil life build and reinforce these pathways year after year, making them easier for future roots to follow without the need to start over. If we want deeper, healthier roots, we have to think beyond the top 6 inches. That means looking at the biology, not just the mechanics , and asking ourselves: What are we missing beneath our feet? 💡 Curious how no-till stacks up in the real world? see how research, field trials, and farmers themselves weigh in:, and the “why” behind the practices: No-Till vs. Tillage: Which Really Lets the Water In? (4 min read) No-Till, No Yield? Are We Putting Corn Above Soybean Yields? (3 min read) Beyond No-Till: Why Crop Rotations Matter More Than You Think When Does No-Till Work? Two Major Studies and What Farmers Told Us What We’re Really Arguing About When We Talk About Tillage?   Other Useful Resources from Dr. Weil If you want to dig deeper into Dr. Weil’s work and the role of cover crops in addressing compaction, here are some excellent starting points: ·      Cover Crops & Soil Compaction – Ray Weil Presentation (Slideshare) ·      YouTube Dr. Weil Taking Cover Crops to the Next Level for Better Management of Nutrients ______________________________________________ ______________________ Visit these “Growing Resilience Through Our Soils” information pages: 1. Podcast page for drought planning fact sheets, Q&As, news, podcasts, and more. 2. Video page to watch videos of other ranchers’ journeys toward improved rangeland/pasture. 3. Follow Growing Resilience on social media: Facebook - Growing Resilience Twitter - @GrowResilience_ Instagram - growingresilience.sd 4. Our homepage: www.growingresiliencesd.com

On our spring tour of South Dakota farmers integrating livestock, my partner in crime, Joe Dickie, and I left Huron, and a couple of hours later crested the rise where Ryan Urban lives. Ryan identifies himself as a fourth-generation Pukwana crop-and-cattle producer—he jokes that they’re “cattle people who farm on the side.” With a name like Urban, I half expected him to grab a guitar and sing us a country tune. Instead, he grabbed the keys to his pickup, and we rode out into the fields under a seventy-degree sky, Joe filming, Ryan talking, and me listening. Around us lay pastures of switchgrass and big bluestem, calving grounds that double as pheasant cover in the fall. A little further on, cereal rye stood ready to graze, stretching the feed window before the native range comes on. This rhythm—calves born in the grass, cows turned into rye, full-season cover crops in summer, aftermath and stalks in winter—spoke to a simple but powerful principle: every acre of farm ground, every year, sees a cow. Ryan’s words hung in the air: “Every acre sees a cow.”  It wasn’t just a slogan—it was an operating system. Grain fields, cover crops, corn stalks, even neighbors’ land without cattle—he brings livestock across them all. In his math, the returns are hard to ignore: grazing corn stalks netted him $86 an acre last winter. Add in the fact that his corn yields are up seventy bushels an acre while using a third less fertilizer, and you start to understand why he says the cows are working for him, not the other way around. On one site that was once a gravel pit, he sifted a shovelful of soil through his fingers, the story deepened. This was no gravel lot anymore—though it once was, back when the interstate was built. Years of no-till, cover crops, and cattle have coaxed back life. Organic matter on some fields tops eight percent, water infiltration has improved, and runoff is nearly gone. “I struggle to keep water in the dugouts now,” he laughed. “It all soaks in.” Critics often say livestock compact the soil. Ryan doesn’t dismiss it—he manages it. He moves cattle off when the frost comes out, uses sacrifice pastures, and times grazing to conditions. It’s not problem-free, but neither is it the obstacle some imagine. What he’s built instead is flexibility: cereal rye in spring, full-season covers in fall, grazing nearly eleven months a year. He measures success not in bags of feed bought, but in days he can graze a cow without opening the checkbook. Ryan’s story has a kinship with others we’ve heard on this tour. Like Cody Merrigan east of Vermillion, who bends his system to fit family life. Like Nate Hicks near Yankton, who treats cows as land managers as much as livestock. Each has carved out a system tuned to their place, their rainfall, their soils. Ryan’s version is rooted in Brule County, where water is scarce, winds are relentless, and resilience is currency. As we wrapped up, the sun slanted across fields where rye, cows, and calves stitched together the fabric of his farm. Ryan said it simply: “I can tell how profitable I’ll be with a cow by how long I can graze her, instead of feeding her.” That, in the end, may be the truest definition of livestock integration—not an add-on, but the living hinge of the whole operation. ______________________________________________ ______________________ Visit these “Growing Resilience Through Our Soils” information pages: 1. Podcast page for drought planning fact sheets, Q&As, news, podcasts, and more. 2. Video page to watch videos of other ranchers’ journeys toward improved rangeland/pasture. 3. Follow Growing Resilience on social media: Facebook - Growing Resilience Twitter - @GrowResilience_ Instagram - growingresilience.sd 4. Our homepage: www.growingresiliencesd.com

On the South Dakota Coteau, the Michalski family transformed marginal cropland into a thriving, diverse pasture. Discover their grazing strategies, land ethic, and how diversity drives both resilience and profit. It was July 2021 when Joe Dickie and I rolled up to the Michalski spread on the Coteau. Waiting to greet us were Darin, his wife Jessica, and their son Cutler. Darin cut a dashing figure — blue sleeveless button-up, well-worn jeans, cowboy boots planted in the ground, and a baseball cap pulled low. There was something in his stance — easy, alert, weathered by work — that reminded me, apart from the lack of a slouch hat, a little of an Australian drover. I do not doubt that the image he cut with his pasture in the background was the reason his videos attracted more than a few eyeballs on our social media page. I’ll own it now: this story should have been told long ago. Life and projects stacked up, and other deadlines jumped the queue. But sometimes, you need a few years to understand what you saw — to gather the science, the context, and the perspective that make a story worth telling. And now, with a summer full of conversations about forbs, diversity, and resilience, I see the Michalski place for what it is: a master class in the land ethic. A place made for pasture The Coteau isn’t a forgiving country for row crops. It’s rolling glacial ground — thin soils draped over old ice-scoured hills — where rain comes when it will, and water has its own mind. For years, parts of Darin’s operation were cropped, but the returns were thin, the soil tired. So he began converting marginal cropland back into pasture. Not out of nostalgia, but because grass, forbs, and legumes were what the land wanted to be. “We’re better able to utilize our resources — moving from cool seasons into warm seasons, letting them regrow, and getting more grazing time on each paddock,” he says. Diversity didn’t just happen When we stepped into Darin’s pastures, the first thing he did wasn’t talk about pounds of beef or bushels of grain. He pointed out plants. Leadplant, purple prairie clover, Canada milkvetch — and plenty of others that most folks might call weeds. He’s learned that timing is the lever that changes everything. “We’ve found that hitting those cool-season invaders hard in the spring really makes a difference. You knock them back, and suddenly those native warm-season grasses you hadn’t seen in years start coming back.” This wasn’t just good botany — it was good grazing. Those forbs and warm-season natives aren’t filler; they’re protein-rich, drought-hardy, and they stretch the grazing season deep into the shoulder months. More grass, longer seasons By rotating carefully and letting plants recover, Darin has not only rebuilt plant diversity — he’s extended the grazing window. “The latest we’ve had our cows out was February 1st. We didn’t run out of grass — we ran out of places to graze. That’s how much we’re able to extend the season now.” That’s not just a win for the cattle — it’s a win for the balance sheet. Less hay bought in, fewer tractor hours, more resilience in dry years. On the Coteau, that kind of insurance is worth as much as rain in July. Choosing diversity over the quick fix Darin learned the hard way what happens when you try to “clean up” a pasture with chemicals. “I sprayed all my pastures once years ago, then it turned dry, and it set my grass back so bad. There were no legumes or forbs. I went away from that, and now I’d rather manage weeds with grazing timing than wipe out the diversity.” It’s a lesson in patience — one that runs counter to the idea that faster is always better. In this country, it’s often the slower road that takes you where you want to go. The land ethic in practice When Aldo Leopold wrote about the “land ethic,” he described a shift from seeing land as a commodity to seeing it as a community — something you belong to, not something you own. On the Michalski spread, that ethic isn’t a plaque on the wall; it’s in the daily decisions, the rotation plans, and the way Darin talks with landlords about grass health. “We’re not perfect by any means, but we’re trying to improve the land — and that should be worth a lot.” It’s also in the way he sees cattle: not just as a product, but as the engine that turns sunlight, soil, and a mess of plants into food. “When you can take plants that people can’t eat and turn them into a nutrient-dense protein package, you’re converting something undervalued into something essential.” Right on time Yes, this story is late. But maybe it took two extra years and a July spent knee-deep in forbs to see just how much it matters. In a season when we’ve been talking about the value of diversity, the Michalskis are proof that it’s not theory — it’s what makes the land, the livestock, and the livelihood more resilient. ______________________________________________ ______________________ Visit these “Growing Resilience Through Our Soils” information pages: 1. Podcast page for drought planning fact sheets, Q&As, news, podcasts, and more. 2. Video page to watch videos of other ranchers’ journeys toward improved rangeland/pasture. 3. Follow Growing Resilience on social media: Facebook - Growing Resilience Twitter - @GrowResilience_ Instagram - growingresilience.sd 4. Our homepage: www.growingresiliencesd.com